At Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:44:42 +0200,Olivier Galibert wrote:> > On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 02:31:08PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:> > So, do you mean the soft-mixing is the biggest issue? That's just a> > part of a design issue, and if we want to go to that way, the> > impelemtation would be trivial, regardless on ALSA or not. Totally > > irrelevant argument regarding "remove ALSA".> > Soft mixing is actually the biggest issue because if you had> generalized soft-mixing in the kernel-visible audio ports[1] you would> win two things:> > - programs could use the OSS API without interfering with the ALSA one> or which each other> > - programs coult use the ALSA kernel API directly without interfering> either, which would allow alternative libalsa implementations for> those who hate the current one> > Frankly, mandatory libraries are extremely annoying, and mandatory> extremely complex overdesigned libraries are simply unbearable.

Hm... I don't agree much with the virtual relay device solution.I once experimentally implemented an ALSA-OSS virtual kernel driver.But, it just gives more complexity.

Yes, the library solution has merits and demerits. The library shouldhave been differently designed. But, I don't think the virtual relayis the best solution just because you can use a bare kernelinterface...